Episode 647: The Baseball Ethics Edition
Date April 1, 2015 Summary Ben and Sam answer listener emails about whether we should talk about teams’ use of stats, whether injury research should be shared, how to break up with a team, and more. Topics * Differences of talking about scouting vs. sabermetrics * How to stop rooting for a fan * Correlation between BABIP and shifts * Episode 637 follow-up: Ethical obligations for information sharing * When to give away a baseball Intro Alan Parsons Project, "Don't Answer Me" Banter * Ben and Sam reflect on the season preview series and discuss the early banter from the show. * Matt Albers made the Chicago White Sox roster. Sam does not think it is a good team for him to be on to get a save. * In a recent ESPN player poll, 19% of players said that if they were commissioner for a day they would shorten the season. Sam thinks attendance would drop if there were fewer games. * 13% of respondents said they didn't watch Game 7 of the 2014 World Series. Email Questions * Sean: "I am fascinated by the debate/non-debate/imaginary debate of sabermetrics vs. scouting. Are we to the point at which sabermetrics/analysis/stats can and should be viewed in the same light as scouting? For the most part we take it for granted that all teams are very good at scouting and if there are differences they are probably minor or indistinguishable and/or it's very difficult to figure out which teams are the best and worst. With sabermetrics we seem to want to peg and rank teams as sabermetric or anti-sabermetric and figure out to what degree teams are or aren't sabermetrically inclined. It seems to me we are approaching the point where all teams are very good at sabermetrics and if there are differences they are probably minor and indistinguishable and/or it's very difficult to figure out which teams are the best and worst. I know that you've touched on it before that the whole ranking of teams by how sabermetric they are is more about PR and public perception of teams and how vocal certain teams are about sabermetric, but is it finally time to view all this the same way we view scouting? If a team talked about how scouting friendly they were and that they implement scouting into all their decision making, such comments would be ignored and would be pretty absurd since scouting is such a part of the fabric of the game." * Eric (San Francisco, CA): "I need some advice on how to break up with a team. I am a lifelong Mets fan and I just don't want to support or care about them anymore. Collapses in 2007 and 2008, eight straight seasons out of the playoffs, incredibly disappointing stars (Alomar, Vaughn, Bay) and consistent underperformance were not enough to scare me away but I'm finally fed up with ownership. The Madoff scandal was embarrassing but the Castergine discrimination lawsuit is sickening. I don't want to root for a team owned by the Wilpons anymore. So how do I do it? It seems like you both managed to give up your early life rooting interests, is there anything you can suggest other than work in baseball full time? My disgust at ownership hasn't stopped me from turning a rueful eye towards spring training Matt Harvey updates and I'm irrationally excited about David Wright's 3 spring home runs. How do I quit this team?" * Russell: "Last week there was a question about whether a team who had discovered the secret to ending all elbow injuries had a moral obligation to inform and share with the other 29 teams. Let's turn that one on its head. Suppose that an independent researcher made the discovery, the person could either publish the results in some appropriate journal where everyone would find out about it or could shop his or her knowledge to all 30 teams and take the highest bid. Could a researcher be ethically/morally justified by taking the latter approach? Even better, let's assume that freedom from elbow injuries is worth X wins, let's say 2 wins per year to throw a number on it. Now let's suppose that the researcher found a foolproof undetectable, uncopyable way for a team to clear 2 wins by adopting some weird strategic trick. Would that person be morally justified in shipping his or her services to the highest bidder or should that person simply post about it on their blog for all to see." Play Index * Sam tries to figure out why BABIP is identical to past years even when shift usage has increased. One hypothesis is because is that because in certain base/out situations teams will not shift. * Ryan Howard was not shifted when there was 0 or only 1 runner on base. * Shifts are not usually employed when runners are on 1st and 2nd, but 2014 league-wide BABIP in that situation was consistent with the 20 previous years. Notes * Ben thinks that there is more variation between how teams use sabermetrics than how teams use stats. * Sam suggests that the only way to reclaim childhood levels of fandom with a new team is to have a child and root for the team they support. * Sam's Play Index segment is nearly identical to the Play Index segment from Episode 541. * Sam is upset at people who shame fans that want compensation for returning a milestone home run ball to a player. * Sam discusses the joys of getting a ball on a 1-10 scale, "To a kid, all of them are a 9. They're only not a 10 'cause kids have short attention spans and kids are incapable of feeling a 10. Like they don't know that a 10 exists. That's why we don't let them get married or drink alcohol, because they can't appreciate the joy of a 10 yet...You think those kids are getting imperial stouts? No!" Links * Effectively Wild Episode 647: The Baseball Ethics Edition * MLB Confidential by Morty Ain, Anna Katherine Clemmons, Dan Friedell, and Stacey Pressman * When to Give Away a Baseball by Sam Miller Category:Episodes Category:Email Episodes